Collision Investigations and Trial Partnering With Reconstruction - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The audio portion of the conference may be accessed via the telephone or by using your computer's

• speakers. Please refer to the instructions emailed to registrants for additional information. If you

have any questions, please contact Customer Service at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 10.

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A

Accident Reconstruction in Truck Collision Investigations and Trial

Partnering With Reconstruction Experts to Maximize Case Value

Today’s faculty features:

1pm Eastern | 12pm Central | 11am Mountain | 10am Pacific THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 2015

J.J. Burns, Esq., Dollar Burns & Becker, Kansas City, Mo. Thomas W. James, Attorney, Michigan Auto Law, Farmington Hills, Mich. Robert E. Larson, P .E., Senior Managing Engineer , Exponent, Phoenix

Tips for Optimal Quality

Sound Quality If you are listening via your computer speakers, please note that the quality

• f your sound will vary depending on the speed and quality of your internet

connection. If the sound quality is not satisfactory, you may listen via the phone: dial 1-866-869-6667 and enter your PIN when prompted. Otherwise, please send us a chat or e-mail sound@straffordpub.com immediately so we can address the problem. If you dialed in and have any difficulties during the call, press *0 for assistance. Viewing Quality To maximize your screen, press the F11 key on your keyboard. To exit full screen, press the F11 key again.

FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY

Continuing Education Credits

In order for us to process your continuing education credit, you must confirm your participation in this webinar by completing and submitting the Attendance Affirmation/Evaluation after the webinar. A link to the Attendance Affirmation/Evaluation will be in the thank you email that you will receive immediately following the program. For additional information about CLE credit processing call us at 1-800-926-7926

• ext. 35.

FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY

Program Materials

If you have not printed the conference materials for this program, please complete the following steps:

• Click on the ^ symbol next to “Conference Materials” in the middle of the left-

hand column on your screen.

• Click on the tab labeled “Handouts” that appears, and there you will see a

PDF of the slides for today's program.

• Double click on the PDF and a separate page will open.
• Print the slides by clicking on the printer icon.

FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY

Robert E. Larson, P.E.

Senior Managing Engineer rlarson@exponent.com

What is Accident Reconstruction?

• What do you need to know?

– How fast were the vehicles going? – Why did the vehicle loose control? – Why did the vehicle tip over? – Why didn’t the driver avoid the collision? – Did the Driver or Vehicle or Terrain cause the accident? – Did the load cause the accident? – Should the driver have been able to control the vehicle or terrain condition? – Would a vehicle with Option X experienced the same accident? – …

6

What is Heavy Truck Accident Reconstruction?

7

Measurement Technology

• Hand measurements
• 3D Scanning of site and vehicles
• Total Station survey
• Photogrammetry

8

3D Scanning and Modelling

9

Old-School Photogrammetry

10

Event Data Recorder (EDR)

• Heavy Truck Event Data Recorder (EDR) is a

function of the Engine Control Module (ECM)

• Engine dependent, not ‘vehicle’ dependent

11

Driver Monitoring

• Camera on driver and driver’s view
• Speed, steering and braking
• Vehicle response (accelerometers, ‘G-force’)
• Location (GPS)

12

Analysis Technology

• Hand Calculations
• Spreadsheet Calculations
• Simulation
• Testing

13

Safety Technology

• Anti-lock Brakes (ABS)
• Stability Control (ESC)
• Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS)

14

Commercial Vehicle ADAS

15

15

VORAD

• Development of VORAD began in 1972, prototype in 1987,

SAE paper in 1992 introducing the functionality

• Introduced as Eaton VORAD in 1995
• Forward Collision Warning and Blind Spot Warning (side)
• Two Radar sensors, one forward (350’), one side (10’)
• Aftermarket system, requires careful alignment of the Radar

sensors

• Introduced Adaptive Cruise Control
• Also included early version of an Event Data Recorder

16

Current Commercial Vehicle Systems

17

17

Forward Collision Warning

• Moving Vehicles and

Static Objects Adaptive Cruise Control (1/3 braking capability) Collision Imminent Braking (2/3 braking capability) 18

Autonomous Commercial Vehicles

20

20

Heavy Truck Accident Reconstruction Examples

21

21

Visibility - Pedestrians

22

Loss-of-Control - Rollover

23

Loss-of-Control Rollover

24

Loss-of-Control – Rollover Stability Calculations

25

Collision – EDR Data - Simulation

26

Heavy Truck Stability with a Trailing Axle Tire Blowout

27

 FHWA Bridge Formula Weight Limit  Allowable Axle Weight is a function of

 Length between Axles  Number of Axle

Trailing Axle

28

 Case Study Accident

Background

View Looking Upstream View Looking Downstream 29

 Case Study Accident

Background

View Looking Upstream View Looking Downstream 30

 Case Study Accident

Background

View Looking Upstream View Looking Downstream 31

 Case Study Accident

Background

View Looking Upstream View Looking Downstream 32

 Purpose: Evaluate potential loss of control due

to trailing axle tire air out

 Test Conditions:

 Baseline Tests – Straight ahead  Reduced Pressure  Zero Pressure  Zero Pressure at speed  Tire Blowout  Baseline Test - Aggressive Steer Input

Testing

33

 Instrumentation:

 Position and Velocity (GPS)  Acceleration and Angular Rates (IMU)  Steering Wheel Torque  Steering Wheel Angle  Trailing Axle Angle  Throttle Position Sensor

 Photo Documentation:

 Still Photographs  4 On-board cameras  1 Off-board camera

Testing

34

 Baseline Straight Line Test Results

 Steering Wheel Angle = +-20 Degrees  Steering Wheel Torque = +-2 ft-lbs

 Tire Pressure Reduced to 10 psi

 Results similar to baseline values  Low trailing axle tire pressure unapparent to driver

Baseline Straight Ahead

35

Tire Pressure Reduced to 0 psi

36

Trailing Axle Angle Steering Wheel Angle

Tire Pressure 10 psi v. 0 psi

• 4
• 2

2 4 6 8 10 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Trailing Axle Road Wheel Angle (Deg) Time (s)

Test 04 and 05 Comparison

04 10 psi 05 Fully Deflated

• 60
• 40
• 20

20 40 60 80 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Steering Wheel Angle (Deg) Time (s)

Test 04 and 05 Comparison

04 10 psi 05 Fully Deflated

37

Lowered axle with deflated tire at 35 mph Steering correction: 40 - 60 deg.

38

Simulated Blowout at 35 mph

39

• 10
• 5

5 10 15 20 25 30

• 30
• 15

15 30 45 60 75 90 5 10 15 20 25 30

Trailing Axle Road Wheel Angle (deg) Steering Wheel Angle (Deg) Time (s)

Test 10

SWA (deg) TA RWA (deg)

80+ deg. Steering Correction Full Lock Trailing Axle

Simulated Blowout at 35 mph

40

Aggressive Left Steer Input at 35 mph

41

Comparison – 35 mph

80+ deg. Steering to regain lane 30 deg. Steering 0.3+ g

Trailing Axle Blow Out 30-deg Step Steer

42

 Deflating tire effects were not noticeable until

tire was completely deflated

 Driver may be unaware that a trailing axle tire is low

until it is deflated.

 Steering torque did not provide driver feedback.

 Deflation of a trailing axle tire can cause a

severe destabilizing effect to the vehicle

 Generated tire forces near maximum capacity 11 feet

behind rear axle

 Large steering required to maintain lane position at

35 mph

Conclusions

43

SAE International Journal of Commercial Vehicles 2012-01-0238 http://papers.sae.org/2012-01-0238 44

 Wide variety of issues  Requires a wide variety of tools  Technology is continuously changing

 How A/R is done  What data is available  What is expected of the vehicle

Heavy Truck Accident Reconstruction

http://www.exponent.com/robert_larson/ 45

J.J. Burns, Esq.

Dollar Burns & Becker jjb@dollar-law.com

First Considerations: Is This a Reconstruction Case?

• Timeline
• Liability
• Damages
• Known Unknowns – Unknown Unknowns
• Police Involvement – Resources
• Other Relevant Factual & Legal Issues
• Doubt =› Reconstruction
• Options

47

Range of Reconstruction Options & Considerations

• Data Preservation
• Scene Photos & Basic Measurements
• Vehicle Inspections
• Downloads
• Total Station
• 3D Laser Scanning
• Paint Samples
• Light/Lamp Testing
• Glass Shards
• Exemplar Vehicles

48

49

50

Communications with the Reconstructionist, Part I

Legal Issues:

• Work Product
• Expert Disclosures
• Standards
• Testifying

51

2010 Amendments to FRCP 26

Prior to the amendments, many courts held that all information viewed by an expert was fully discoverable, including discussions with counsel and drafts of expert reports  New rules protect drafts of any report or disclosure required under 26(a)(2)  New rules also protect communications between the party’s attorney and any witness required to provide a report under 26(a)(2)(B)

52

2010 Amendments to FRCP 26

• EXCEPT to the extent that the communications

(1) relate to compensation; (2) identify facts or data that party’s attorney provided and that the expert considered in forming opinions; or (3) identify assumptions that the party’s attorney provided and that the expert relied on in forming opinions.

• Also – it has been held that expert materials and

communications that fall outside the scope of 26(b)(4)(B)-(C) are not work product, and are therefore discoverable. See, e.g., 280 F .R.D. 506, 512.

53

Pennsylvania’s Work-Product Doctrine

• “a party may obtain discovery of any matter discoverable under

Rule 4003.1 even though prepared in anticipation of litigation or trial by or for another party or for that other party’s representative... The discovery shall not include disclosure of the mental impressions of a party’s attorney or his or her conclusions,

• pinions, memoranda, notes or summaries, legal research or legal
• theories. With respect to the representative of a party other than

the party’s attorney, discovery shall not include disclosure of his or her mental impressions, conclusions or opinions respecting the value or merit of a claim or defense or respecting strategy or tactics.”

• Barrick vs. Holy Spirit Hospital (Pa. 2014)

The rules broadly allow for a party to obtain discovery regarding any matter... and included in this broad scope is a party’s ability to discover the facts known and opinions held by an expert.

54

Communications with the Reconstructionist, Part II

Fact Issues:

• Nature & Scope of Work
• Expectations
• Relevancy
• Education from the Expert

55

Reconstructionist Prep

• Landmines
• Cross your Expert
• Use your other experts
• Legal education

56

Animation Admissibility Issues

• Nature of the objection
• Prejudice
• Materiality / Necessity
• Reliability / Accuracy
• Animation vs. Simulation
• Expert prep

57

EFFECTIVELY USING ACCIDENT RECONSTRUCTION IN TRUCK COLLISION CASES

Tom James MichiganAutoLaw.com Farmington Hills, MI

Why use Accident Reconstruction

 Police won’t reconstruct a collision for us  Liability appears bad but is it really  Gap between facts  Balance against opposing AR  Viable case or not

59

Accident Reconstruction – Truck case

 Qualify your AR for trucking  Does AR have resources to manage truck case  Spoliation issues

 EXHIBIT 1 - Spoliation Letter to Defendants

 Full scale vehicle testing / exemplar  Help jury understand truck driving  Animations or simulations  Dynamics of tractor-trailer articulation  Conspicuity

60

How to use Accident Reconstruction

 PHASE 1 – Preliminary Phase

 Gather information:

 Police report, measurements, videos, audio, sight inspection,

vehicle inspection, ECM, EMS records, witness statements, service records, etc and get to AR

 Evaluate for additional experts

 Human factors, conspicuity, bio-mechanical, etc

 Keep or refer out

61

How to use Accident Reconstruction

 PHASE 2 – DISCOVERY

 If you haven’t developed written truck discovery, then

utilize the experienced AR to assist you in drafting appropriate discovery, or outlines for depositions

 RPD, ROG, and depositions to AR  Exemplar for audio or visual testing  Defendant’s vehicle for inspection and other repair

related documents

 EXHIBIT 2 – Opposing AR deposition outline

62

63

64

Perception – Reaction Time (PRT)

 The time between perception and initial reaction  Analyze Defendant AR’s selection of PRT  Have your AR use a range of PRT  “Accountability” forces this issue as we should

analyze for our clients as well as Defendant

65

How to use Accident Reconstruction

 PHASE 3 – TRIAL

 K I S S  Live trial witness  Use the best, easiest to understand exhibits  Use of animation v simulation  Prepare for opposing AR cross

66

Client’s SUV was bullet vehicle

67

68

69

70

71

70 MPH = 102.67 Feet Per Second

72

AR explains driver’s field of view

73

AR explains purpose of mirrors

74